M
Michigan Farmer
Guest
THE UNITED STATES CONSTITUTION Article. VI
.. . . . .
The Senators and Representatives before mentioned, and the Members of the several
State Legislatures, and all executive and judicial Officers, both of the United States
and of the several States, shall be bound by Oath or Affirmation, to support this
Constitution;
but no religious Test shall ever be required as a Qualification to any Office or
public Trust under the United States.
AlterNet
Inquisition 2008: Candidates Get Grilled by the Media's Holy Standards
By Rob Boston, Church & State Magazine
Posted on September 1, 2007, Printed on September 2, 2007
http://www.alternet.org/story/61381/
Democratic presidential contender John Edwards was in a tough spot.
Participating in a CNN debate on "faith and values," Edwards was confronted with a
question that can best be described as the theological equivalent of "Are you still
beating your wife?" Host Soledad O'Brien pressed Edwards to discuss the "biggest sin
you've ever committed."
Edwards dodged the question, telling O'Brien, "I'd have a very hard time telling you
one thing, one specific sin. If I've had a day in my 54 years that I haven't sinned
multiple times I'd be amazed. We all fall short, which is why we have to ask for
forgiveness from the Lord."
During the same June 4 event, U.S. Sen. Hillary Clinton (D-N.Y.) was asked to explain
how her faith got her through her husband's marital infidelity, and U.S. Sen. Barack
Obama (D-Ill.) was asked if he believes God takes sides in wars.
Many Americans might be surprised that such questions are being asked at all, given
the pressing international and domestic issues vying for the candidates' attention.
With a war in Iraq raging, health care in crisis and energy costs spiraling, lots of
voters are interested in hearing the candidates' specific policy positions on key
issues, not bromides on how often a candidate prays and what he or she prays for.
Yet many candidates remain convinced that millions of voters are fixated on religion
-- and the media apparently agrees. Although the general election is more than a year
off, the topic of faith has been unusually prominent so far. Indications are that will
continue.
The phenomenon is bipartisan. As some Democrats seek to add a little more "God talk"
on the stump, Republican contenders are frequently heard talking about religion -- an
attempt to sway voters aligned with the Religious Right, a well-funded, well-organized
presence in the GOP that always flexes more muscle during the primary season, when
more ideologically minded voters are active.
Why is religion so prominent in the race so soon? Several factors are at work. Among
them is what may be a sea change in the way the Democratic Party deals with religion.
Democrats are being advised by moderate evangelicals like Jim Wallis to talk more
openly about faith and God. (A Wallis group, Call to Renewal, sponsored the June
debate on CNN. A similar event is planned for the top GOP candidates.) In the 2006
elections, some Democrats won seats after raising religious themes. Some advisors want
the party to exploit this trend.
Time magazine reported July 12 on the efforts of one of those strategists, Mara
Vanderslice, who worked on John Kerry's presidential campaign in 2004 and advised
various Democratic campaigns in 2006. Last year, it was reported that Vanderslice, who
was raised Unitarian but converted to evangelical Christianity as an adult, advised
candidates not to use the term "separation of church and state," arguing it alienates
some voters.
Vanderslice has more advice for the Democrats in 2008.
"It has to be authentic," she told CNN.com recently. "This is not about 'Jesus-ing' up
the party, so to speak .... It just won't work if it's seen as a cynical ploy."
Leading Democratic officials are paying attention to this type of advice. On Capitol
Hill, Time reported, Speaker Nancy Pelosi asked U.S. Rep. David Price (D-N.C.) to
oversee an effort to reach out to religious voters.
According to Time, Price chastised his colleagues for their stands on some
church-state issues. For example, Price argues that Democrats missed an opportunity
when President George W. Bush launched his "faith-based" initiative.
"We should have said, 'Welcome to the fray, Mr. President. Where have you been?
Because we have been at this a long time. So we want to work with you on that,'" Price
said. "Instead, Democrats took a dim view of it almost in principle."
Oval Office aspirants like Clinton, Obama, Edwards and others are taking the advice to
boost talk about religion as well. As the newsweekly noted, "Clinton has hired Burns
Strider, a congressional staffer (and evangelical Baptist from Mississippi) who is
assembling a faith steering group from major denominations and sends out a weekly
wrap-up, Faith, Family and Values. Edwards has been organizing conference calls with
progressive religious leaders and is about to embark on a 12-city poverty tour. In the
past month alone, Obama's campaign has run six faith forums in New Hampshire, where
local clergy and laypeople discuss religious engagement in politics."
As party strategist Mike McCurry told Time, "What we're seeing is a 'Great Awakening'
in the Democratic Party," invoking a period in early American history when evangelical
forms of religion became popular.
Talk about God reverberates on the stump. On the campaign trail, Obama has perhaps
exploited this most skillfully. The junior senator from Illinois came to national
attention largely because of a speech he delivered during the 2004 Democratic Party
convention. During the speech, Obama uttered a line that has since become famous: "The
pundits like to slice and dice our country into red states and blue states -- red
states for Republicans, blue states for Democrats. But I've got news for them, too. We
worship an awesome God in the blue states, and we don't like federal agents poking
around our libraries in the red states."
On the hustings, Obama is often upfront about his faith, sometimes mentioning his
conversion and his longtime membership in the United Church of Christ. His Web site
contains a special section titled "People of Faith for Barack" that includes personal
endorsements from several members of the clergy and excerpts from speeches the
Illinois senator has given about the role of religion in his personal and public
lives. (Obama, however, has also endorsed the separation of church and state, noting
that many evangelicals fought for it in the colonial era.)
The media has picked up on this trend and, in fact, fueled it. A spate of
"Democrats-get-religion" stories has appeared, as well as religious profiles of
specific candidates. In early July, The New York Times ran a lengthy front-page
article focusing on Clinton's religious life. The New York senator talked of how she
carries a Bible on the campaign trail, reads commentaries on the Scripture and how she
has felt "the presence of the Holy Spirit on many occasions."
Clinton added that she believes in the resurrection of Jesus but is less certain that
Christianity is the only path to salvation.
But there are dangers to such an approach as well. At least a third of the Democratic
Party base is composed of voters who attend church rarely, if ever. Many of these
secularists are wary of the new emphasis on God talk and are concerned that the party
might be moving away from its stand in favor of church-state separation.
Some analysts say the Democrats' success in 2006 came because the party captured a
larger percentage of voters who say they don't go to church. Exit polls showed the
Democrats' share of this vote rose from 60 percent to 67 percent. Analysts argue that
this bloc provided the margin of victory and assert that attempts to win over
conservative evangelicals are bound to fail.
Polls show most Americans are wary of basing policy explicitly on a politician's
interpretation of the Bible. A poll released by Time magazine in July asked, "Do you
think that a president should or should not use his or her personal interpretation of
the Bible to make decisions as president?" A solid majority of 62.2 percent said no.
Less than half that number, 28.7 percent, said yes.
Even most self-identified Republicans were wary, with 46.4 percent saying they
disagree with Bible-based policy, and 42.6 percent agreeing.
Nevertheless, religious themes have frequently driven the Republican campaign this
season as candidates seek to curry favor with the Religious Right.
Many Religious Right activists are horrified at the thought that former New York City
mayor Rudy Giuliani will win the nomination. Giuliani is pro-choice on abortion,
favors some gay rights and has been married three times. Candidates like former
Arkansas Gov. Mike Huckabee, U.S. Rep. Tom Tancredo (R-Colo.) and U.S. Sen. Sam
Brownback (R-Kan.) are closely identified with the Religious Right, but concerns
linger that they would be weak candidates in the general election. Some Religious
Right leaders hope to stop Giuliani by promoting an alternative, such as former Sen.
Fred Thompson (R-Tenn.).
James Dobson, the Religious Right powerhouse who founded Focus on the Family, has been
clear about Giuliani.
"I cannot, and will not," he said, "vote for Rudy Giuliani in 2008. It is an
irrevocable decision."
The right-wing evangelical magazine World reported that Richard Land, president of the
Southern Baptist Convention's Ethics & Religious Liberty Commission, said something
similar: "I wouldn't even consider voting for him." Meanwhile, Tony Perkins of the
Family Research Council (FRC) has also blasted Giuliani.
With the GOP front-runner failing to inspire enthusiasm, other candidates are seeking
the Religious Right vote. Former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney has been making a
strong play for it. However, political observers say Romney has two strikes against
him: He ran as a moderate on social issues when seeking office in Massachusetts, and
he is a member of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints (the Mormons).
Romney now claims his positions on issues like abortion and gay rights have changed.
Some evangelicals accept that transformation, but others remain wary. In addition,
members of a hardcore faction that considers Mormonism a cult often challenge Romney
about his membership in the Mormon faith during public events.
Influential Religious Right leaders have spurned Romney's overtures as well. In mid
July, Max Blumenthal of The Nation reported that Romney was being "swift-boated"
through a coordinated effort.
The assault began July 5 when Focus on the Family attacked Romney in a press release,
asserting that Romney did nothing to stop Marriott Hotels from offering pornographic
movies in rooms during his tenure on the hotel chain's board from 1992-2001.
The FRC soon piled on, blasting Romney's supposed tolerance for porn to the Associated
Press. The assault was also distributed to various right-wing Web sites.
Donald Wildmon's American Family Association (AFA) quickly joined the attack. The
AFA's right-wing news service, OneNewsNow, ran a video clip of FRC President Tony
Perkins criticizing Romney.
"This carefully sequenced attack on Romney over hotel porn is just the opening volley
in what appears to be a concerted effort to doom his candidacy," wrote Blumenthal.
"Gary Glenn, president of the American Family Association's Michigan chapter, told me,
'This is just part of a broader pattern of concern over Mitt Romney's record of
aggressively promoting abortion on demand, the homosexual agenda and gun control. We
are judging Romney by his record.'"
Blumenthal also reported that the FRC is promoting Thompson to Religious Right
activists behind the scenes.
"Less than two weeks before Focus on the Family launched its attack on Romney, the
Family Research Council began an informal campaign to rally support for Thompson," he
wrote. "Without fanfare, the Family Research Council's director of web communications,
Joe Carter, and the group's web editor, Jared Bridges, founded 'Blogs for Fred,' a
website that alternately shields Thompson from criticism and promotes him as the Great
Right Hope. When Carter and Bridges are not plumping for Thompson, they blog on the
website of the Family Research Council, advancing the causes of faith, family and
freedom for the purportedly nonpartisan 501(c)(3) organization."
Hoping to deflect the attacks, Romney continues to play up his Religious Right
friendly views. He recently released a new television commercial that attacks popular
culture as violent and over-sexualized. Romney promises to clean up Web-based porn but
does not say how.
Romney can also point to support from a few prominent Religious Right figures. His
"Faith and Values Steering Committee" includes TV preacher Pat Robertson's top
attorney Jay Sekulow, Religious Right public relations wizard Mark DeMoss and
California gay-bashing minister Lou Sheldon. One of Sekulow's sons, Jordan, serves on
a similar Romney committee.
Brownback has had to make do with a lesser light. "Christian nation" advocate David
Barton has been making campaign appearances on behalf of the Kansas senator.
Thompson, meanwhile, is making a big play for the movement's vote as well. U.S. News
reported July 15 that Thompson has hired Bill Wichterman, who served as liaison to
conservative groups for former Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist, and Joseph Cella,
president of the ultra-orthodox Catholic group Fidelis, to lead an effort to reach out
to religious conservatives.
Reported Dan Gilgoff, "The aides are arranging more meetings between Thompson and
conservative Christian leaders and have launched a rapid-response operation to fend
off attacks on Thompson's conservative credentials."
Romney and Thompson aren't the only GOP hopefuls wooing the Religious Right. Others
are stressing religious themes as well. At one Republican debate, the candidates were
asked if they accept evolution. Three candidates -- Huckabee, Brownback and Tancredo
-- said they reject it outright, and many of the others dissembled.
U.S. Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.), who blasted the Religious Right as "agents of
intolerance" in 2000, has been eager to make amends this time around. After saying he
accepts evolution during the debate, McCain quickly issued a statement backing the
teaching of "other theories," a move that was seen as a sop toward "intelligent design."
Even Giuliani has been scrambling to find ways to move to the right. He has promised
to appoint Supreme Court justices in the mold of Antonin Scalia, and he has appeared
at TV preacher Pat Robertson's Regent University. While there, Giuliani sat down for
an interview with Robertson's Christian Broadcasting Network.
Asked about the Supreme Court's school prayer rulings, Giuliani said, "I thought some
of them went too far in the direction of over-emphasizing separation of church and
state, and underemphasizing the free exercise of religion."
But there's a risk in all of this. A recent poll of Republican voters, conducted for
the Republican Main Street Partnership and three other moderate GOP organizations by
Fabrizio, McLaughlin and Associates, found 53 percent saying the party "has spent too
much time focusing on moral issues such as abortion and gay marriage and should
instead be spending time focusing on economic issues such as taxes and government
spending." Seventy-two percent said the government should not interfere with legal
abortion, and nearly 80 percent backed employment protections for gay people.
Results like this have infuriated Religious Right leaders. Texas preacher Rick
Scarborough, who longs to take the late Jerry Falwell's place, blasted the poll
results in a message to supporters, calling on his backers to sign a petition to the
Republican National Committee demanding that the party "remain true to its pro-life,
pro-marriage, pro-Biblical morality base."
Scarborough also vowed to hold a series of rallies called "70 Weeks to Save America,"
claiming he hopes to reach two million "values voters."
Aside from making it clear that Giuliani is unacceptable, Scarborough has been coy
about the GOP field. Other Religious Right leaders have not been so reticent.
The SBC's Land has spent the past few months acting as a Republican powerbroker,
despite his denomination's tax-exempt status and alleged non-partisanship.
Land looks to be solidly in Thompson's camp. He has called the former senator a
"southern-fried Reagan" and gushed about Thompson's ability to connect with a crowd.
In May, the Southern Baptist lobbyist introduced Thompson before a meeting of the
secretive Council for National Policy, an influential war council of far-right
leaders. During his remarks, Thompson blasted the Supreme Court for its rulings
upholding church-state separation.
Thompson hasn't won over everyone. FOF's Dobson has suggested that Thompson's
commitment to the Christian faith is weak. Thompson is a member of the fundamentalist
Church of Christ denomination, but some critics have noted that he doesn't seem
especially active. Thompson and his second wife, Jeri Kehn, were married in the United
Church of Christ, an unrelated denomination that is theologically liberal.
In an attempt to pose as even-handed, the Family Research Council plans to hold a
national conference called "The Washington Briefing 2007" Oct. 19-21 in the nation's
capital. The FRC claims that all of the 2008 presidential contenders have been
invited, but Democratic candidates are unlikely to spend time speaking at such a
hostile venue. In fact, FOF and the FRC have made their disdain for the Democratic
field clear. Leaders of the groups seem infuriated that the Democrats are daring to
raise religious themes this time.
Tom Minnery, senior vice president of government and public policy for Focus on the
Family, attacked Obama in a July 5 column that was distributed through WorldNetDaily,
a right-wing Web site.
Minnery called Obama "thoroughly misleading about the proper roles of religion and
government" for suggesting that government should play a bigger role in the provision
of health care and aid to the poor.
Minnery's boss, James Dobson, has been hosting meetings with GOP contenders and is
expected to issue an endorsement closer to the election. He has not bothered to meet
with any Democrats. Dobson, who has formed a political arm called Focus on the Family
Action, claims to endorse candidates as an individual, which the law allows.
But other efforts undertaken by Religious Right groups and leaders are legally
questionable. FRC's attack on Romney and its tacit support for Thompson appears to be
an attempt to affect the outcome of the race. Such tactics skirt the legal line and
may, in fact, lurch over it.
As the election season plays out, Americans United (the organization which publishes
Church and State magazine) has re-activated its Project Fair Play to assure that
houses of worship and non-profit religious groups abide by the law. The Internal
Revenue Service has signaled a crackdown on abuses as well.
Americans United Executive Director Barry W. Lynn has criticized the overemphasis on
religion in both parties, discussing the issue frequently in the media.
At a recent forum on religion in public life in Austin, Lynn blasted candidates in
both parties for "hiring ethics and religion advisers -- that is to say, spin
doctors." Lynn added, "It suggests they are not really comfortable themselves knowing
whatever it is they do believe.
"This is pandering," Lynn concluded.
Rob Boston is the editor of Church and State magazine.
View this story online at: http://www.alternet.org/story/61381/
-----------------------------------------------------------
'''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''
-----------------------------------------------------------
Still the most concise explanation of how we are who we are:
"Let me give you a word of the philosophy of reform. The whole history of the progress
of human liberty shows that all concessions yet made to her August claims, have been
born of earnest struggle. The conflict has been exciting, agitating, all-absorbing,
and for the time being, putting all other tumults to silence. It must do this or it
does nothing. If there is no struggle there is no progress. Those who profess to favor
freedom and yet depreciate agitation, are men who want crops without plowing up the
ground, they want rain without thunder and lightening. They want the ocean without
the awful roar of its many waters."
"This struggle may be a moral one, or it may be a physical one, and it may
be both moral and physical, but it must be a struggle. Power concedes nothing
without a demand. It never did and it never will. Find out just what any people will
quietly submit to and you have found out the exact measure of injustice and wrong
which will be imposed upon them, and these will continue till they are resisted with
either words or blows, or with both. The limits of tyrants are prescribed by the
endurance of those whom they oppress."
---Frederick Douglass
Source: Douglass, Frederick. [1857] (1985). "The Significance of
Emancipation in the West Indies." Speech, Canandaigua, New York, August 3,
1857; collected in pamphlet by author.
http://www.buildingequality.us/Quotes/Frederick_Douglass.htm
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
For the purpose of this perspective, I will consider the following regimes: Nazi
Germany, Fascist Italy, Franco
.. . . . .
The Senators and Representatives before mentioned, and the Members of the several
State Legislatures, and all executive and judicial Officers, both of the United States
and of the several States, shall be bound by Oath or Affirmation, to support this
Constitution;
but no religious Test shall ever be required as a Qualification to any Office or
public Trust under the United States.
AlterNet
Inquisition 2008: Candidates Get Grilled by the Media's Holy Standards
By Rob Boston, Church & State Magazine
Posted on September 1, 2007, Printed on September 2, 2007
http://www.alternet.org/story/61381/
Democratic presidential contender John Edwards was in a tough spot.
Participating in a CNN debate on "faith and values," Edwards was confronted with a
question that can best be described as the theological equivalent of "Are you still
beating your wife?" Host Soledad O'Brien pressed Edwards to discuss the "biggest sin
you've ever committed."
Edwards dodged the question, telling O'Brien, "I'd have a very hard time telling you
one thing, one specific sin. If I've had a day in my 54 years that I haven't sinned
multiple times I'd be amazed. We all fall short, which is why we have to ask for
forgiveness from the Lord."
During the same June 4 event, U.S. Sen. Hillary Clinton (D-N.Y.) was asked to explain
how her faith got her through her husband's marital infidelity, and U.S. Sen. Barack
Obama (D-Ill.) was asked if he believes God takes sides in wars.
Many Americans might be surprised that such questions are being asked at all, given
the pressing international and domestic issues vying for the candidates' attention.
With a war in Iraq raging, health care in crisis and energy costs spiraling, lots of
voters are interested in hearing the candidates' specific policy positions on key
issues, not bromides on how often a candidate prays and what he or she prays for.
Yet many candidates remain convinced that millions of voters are fixated on religion
-- and the media apparently agrees. Although the general election is more than a year
off, the topic of faith has been unusually prominent so far. Indications are that will
continue.
The phenomenon is bipartisan. As some Democrats seek to add a little more "God talk"
on the stump, Republican contenders are frequently heard talking about religion -- an
attempt to sway voters aligned with the Religious Right, a well-funded, well-organized
presence in the GOP that always flexes more muscle during the primary season, when
more ideologically minded voters are active.
Why is religion so prominent in the race so soon? Several factors are at work. Among
them is what may be a sea change in the way the Democratic Party deals with religion.
Democrats are being advised by moderate evangelicals like Jim Wallis to talk more
openly about faith and God. (A Wallis group, Call to Renewal, sponsored the June
debate on CNN. A similar event is planned for the top GOP candidates.) In the 2006
elections, some Democrats won seats after raising religious themes. Some advisors want
the party to exploit this trend.
Time magazine reported July 12 on the efforts of one of those strategists, Mara
Vanderslice, who worked on John Kerry's presidential campaign in 2004 and advised
various Democratic campaigns in 2006. Last year, it was reported that Vanderslice, who
was raised Unitarian but converted to evangelical Christianity as an adult, advised
candidates not to use the term "separation of church and state," arguing it alienates
some voters.
Vanderslice has more advice for the Democrats in 2008.
"It has to be authentic," she told CNN.com recently. "This is not about 'Jesus-ing' up
the party, so to speak .... It just won't work if it's seen as a cynical ploy."
Leading Democratic officials are paying attention to this type of advice. On Capitol
Hill, Time reported, Speaker Nancy Pelosi asked U.S. Rep. David Price (D-N.C.) to
oversee an effort to reach out to religious voters.
According to Time, Price chastised his colleagues for their stands on some
church-state issues. For example, Price argues that Democrats missed an opportunity
when President George W. Bush launched his "faith-based" initiative.
"We should have said, 'Welcome to the fray, Mr. President. Where have you been?
Because we have been at this a long time. So we want to work with you on that,'" Price
said. "Instead, Democrats took a dim view of it almost in principle."
Oval Office aspirants like Clinton, Obama, Edwards and others are taking the advice to
boost talk about religion as well. As the newsweekly noted, "Clinton has hired Burns
Strider, a congressional staffer (and evangelical Baptist from Mississippi) who is
assembling a faith steering group from major denominations and sends out a weekly
wrap-up, Faith, Family and Values. Edwards has been organizing conference calls with
progressive religious leaders and is about to embark on a 12-city poverty tour. In the
past month alone, Obama's campaign has run six faith forums in New Hampshire, where
local clergy and laypeople discuss religious engagement in politics."
As party strategist Mike McCurry told Time, "What we're seeing is a 'Great Awakening'
in the Democratic Party," invoking a period in early American history when evangelical
forms of religion became popular.
Talk about God reverberates on the stump. On the campaign trail, Obama has perhaps
exploited this most skillfully. The junior senator from Illinois came to national
attention largely because of a speech he delivered during the 2004 Democratic Party
convention. During the speech, Obama uttered a line that has since become famous: "The
pundits like to slice and dice our country into red states and blue states -- red
states for Republicans, blue states for Democrats. But I've got news for them, too. We
worship an awesome God in the blue states, and we don't like federal agents poking
around our libraries in the red states."
On the hustings, Obama is often upfront about his faith, sometimes mentioning his
conversion and his longtime membership in the United Church of Christ. His Web site
contains a special section titled "People of Faith for Barack" that includes personal
endorsements from several members of the clergy and excerpts from speeches the
Illinois senator has given about the role of religion in his personal and public
lives. (Obama, however, has also endorsed the separation of church and state, noting
that many evangelicals fought for it in the colonial era.)
The media has picked up on this trend and, in fact, fueled it. A spate of
"Democrats-get-religion" stories has appeared, as well as religious profiles of
specific candidates. In early July, The New York Times ran a lengthy front-page
article focusing on Clinton's religious life. The New York senator talked of how she
carries a Bible on the campaign trail, reads commentaries on the Scripture and how she
has felt "the presence of the Holy Spirit on many occasions."
Clinton added that she believes in the resurrection of Jesus but is less certain that
Christianity is the only path to salvation.
But there are dangers to such an approach as well. At least a third of the Democratic
Party base is composed of voters who attend church rarely, if ever. Many of these
secularists are wary of the new emphasis on God talk and are concerned that the party
might be moving away from its stand in favor of church-state separation.
Some analysts say the Democrats' success in 2006 came because the party captured a
larger percentage of voters who say they don't go to church. Exit polls showed the
Democrats' share of this vote rose from 60 percent to 67 percent. Analysts argue that
this bloc provided the margin of victory and assert that attempts to win over
conservative evangelicals are bound to fail.
Polls show most Americans are wary of basing policy explicitly on a politician's
interpretation of the Bible. A poll released by Time magazine in July asked, "Do you
think that a president should or should not use his or her personal interpretation of
the Bible to make decisions as president?" A solid majority of 62.2 percent said no.
Less than half that number, 28.7 percent, said yes.
Even most self-identified Republicans were wary, with 46.4 percent saying they
disagree with Bible-based policy, and 42.6 percent agreeing.
Nevertheless, religious themes have frequently driven the Republican campaign this
season as candidates seek to curry favor with the Religious Right.
Many Religious Right activists are horrified at the thought that former New York City
mayor Rudy Giuliani will win the nomination. Giuliani is pro-choice on abortion,
favors some gay rights and has been married three times. Candidates like former
Arkansas Gov. Mike Huckabee, U.S. Rep. Tom Tancredo (R-Colo.) and U.S. Sen. Sam
Brownback (R-Kan.) are closely identified with the Religious Right, but concerns
linger that they would be weak candidates in the general election. Some Religious
Right leaders hope to stop Giuliani by promoting an alternative, such as former Sen.
Fred Thompson (R-Tenn.).
James Dobson, the Religious Right powerhouse who founded Focus on the Family, has been
clear about Giuliani.
"I cannot, and will not," he said, "vote for Rudy Giuliani in 2008. It is an
irrevocable decision."
The right-wing evangelical magazine World reported that Richard Land, president of the
Southern Baptist Convention's Ethics & Religious Liberty Commission, said something
similar: "I wouldn't even consider voting for him." Meanwhile, Tony Perkins of the
Family Research Council (FRC) has also blasted Giuliani.
With the GOP front-runner failing to inspire enthusiasm, other candidates are seeking
the Religious Right vote. Former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney has been making a
strong play for it. However, political observers say Romney has two strikes against
him: He ran as a moderate on social issues when seeking office in Massachusetts, and
he is a member of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints (the Mormons).
Romney now claims his positions on issues like abortion and gay rights have changed.
Some evangelicals accept that transformation, but others remain wary. In addition,
members of a hardcore faction that considers Mormonism a cult often challenge Romney
about his membership in the Mormon faith during public events.
Influential Religious Right leaders have spurned Romney's overtures as well. In mid
July, Max Blumenthal of The Nation reported that Romney was being "swift-boated"
through a coordinated effort.
The assault began July 5 when Focus on the Family attacked Romney in a press release,
asserting that Romney did nothing to stop Marriott Hotels from offering pornographic
movies in rooms during his tenure on the hotel chain's board from 1992-2001.
The FRC soon piled on, blasting Romney's supposed tolerance for porn to the Associated
Press. The assault was also distributed to various right-wing Web sites.
Donald Wildmon's American Family Association (AFA) quickly joined the attack. The
AFA's right-wing news service, OneNewsNow, ran a video clip of FRC President Tony
Perkins criticizing Romney.
"This carefully sequenced attack on Romney over hotel porn is just the opening volley
in what appears to be a concerted effort to doom his candidacy," wrote Blumenthal.
"Gary Glenn, president of the American Family Association's Michigan chapter, told me,
'This is just part of a broader pattern of concern over Mitt Romney's record of
aggressively promoting abortion on demand, the homosexual agenda and gun control. We
are judging Romney by his record.'"
Blumenthal also reported that the FRC is promoting Thompson to Religious Right
activists behind the scenes.
"Less than two weeks before Focus on the Family launched its attack on Romney, the
Family Research Council began an informal campaign to rally support for Thompson," he
wrote. "Without fanfare, the Family Research Council's director of web communications,
Joe Carter, and the group's web editor, Jared Bridges, founded 'Blogs for Fred,' a
website that alternately shields Thompson from criticism and promotes him as the Great
Right Hope. When Carter and Bridges are not plumping for Thompson, they blog on the
website of the Family Research Council, advancing the causes of faith, family and
freedom for the purportedly nonpartisan 501(c)(3) organization."
Hoping to deflect the attacks, Romney continues to play up his Religious Right
friendly views. He recently released a new television commercial that attacks popular
culture as violent and over-sexualized. Romney promises to clean up Web-based porn but
does not say how.
Romney can also point to support from a few prominent Religious Right figures. His
"Faith and Values Steering Committee" includes TV preacher Pat Robertson's top
attorney Jay Sekulow, Religious Right public relations wizard Mark DeMoss and
California gay-bashing minister Lou Sheldon. One of Sekulow's sons, Jordan, serves on
a similar Romney committee.
Brownback has had to make do with a lesser light. "Christian nation" advocate David
Barton has been making campaign appearances on behalf of the Kansas senator.
Thompson, meanwhile, is making a big play for the movement's vote as well. U.S. News
reported July 15 that Thompson has hired Bill Wichterman, who served as liaison to
conservative groups for former Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist, and Joseph Cella,
president of the ultra-orthodox Catholic group Fidelis, to lead an effort to reach out
to religious conservatives.
Reported Dan Gilgoff, "The aides are arranging more meetings between Thompson and
conservative Christian leaders and have launched a rapid-response operation to fend
off attacks on Thompson's conservative credentials."
Romney and Thompson aren't the only GOP hopefuls wooing the Religious Right. Others
are stressing religious themes as well. At one Republican debate, the candidates were
asked if they accept evolution. Three candidates -- Huckabee, Brownback and Tancredo
-- said they reject it outright, and many of the others dissembled.
U.S. Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.), who blasted the Religious Right as "agents of
intolerance" in 2000, has been eager to make amends this time around. After saying he
accepts evolution during the debate, McCain quickly issued a statement backing the
teaching of "other theories," a move that was seen as a sop toward "intelligent design."
Even Giuliani has been scrambling to find ways to move to the right. He has promised
to appoint Supreme Court justices in the mold of Antonin Scalia, and he has appeared
at TV preacher Pat Robertson's Regent University. While there, Giuliani sat down for
an interview with Robertson's Christian Broadcasting Network.
Asked about the Supreme Court's school prayer rulings, Giuliani said, "I thought some
of them went too far in the direction of over-emphasizing separation of church and
state, and underemphasizing the free exercise of religion."
But there's a risk in all of this. A recent poll of Republican voters, conducted for
the Republican Main Street Partnership and three other moderate GOP organizations by
Fabrizio, McLaughlin and Associates, found 53 percent saying the party "has spent too
much time focusing on moral issues such as abortion and gay marriage and should
instead be spending time focusing on economic issues such as taxes and government
spending." Seventy-two percent said the government should not interfere with legal
abortion, and nearly 80 percent backed employment protections for gay people.
Results like this have infuriated Religious Right leaders. Texas preacher Rick
Scarborough, who longs to take the late Jerry Falwell's place, blasted the poll
results in a message to supporters, calling on his backers to sign a petition to the
Republican National Committee demanding that the party "remain true to its pro-life,
pro-marriage, pro-Biblical morality base."
Scarborough also vowed to hold a series of rallies called "70 Weeks to Save America,"
claiming he hopes to reach two million "values voters."
Aside from making it clear that Giuliani is unacceptable, Scarborough has been coy
about the GOP field. Other Religious Right leaders have not been so reticent.
The SBC's Land has spent the past few months acting as a Republican powerbroker,
despite his denomination's tax-exempt status and alleged non-partisanship.
Land looks to be solidly in Thompson's camp. He has called the former senator a
"southern-fried Reagan" and gushed about Thompson's ability to connect with a crowd.
In May, the Southern Baptist lobbyist introduced Thompson before a meeting of the
secretive Council for National Policy, an influential war council of far-right
leaders. During his remarks, Thompson blasted the Supreme Court for its rulings
upholding church-state separation.
Thompson hasn't won over everyone. FOF's Dobson has suggested that Thompson's
commitment to the Christian faith is weak. Thompson is a member of the fundamentalist
Church of Christ denomination, but some critics have noted that he doesn't seem
especially active. Thompson and his second wife, Jeri Kehn, were married in the United
Church of Christ, an unrelated denomination that is theologically liberal.
In an attempt to pose as even-handed, the Family Research Council plans to hold a
national conference called "The Washington Briefing 2007" Oct. 19-21 in the nation's
capital. The FRC claims that all of the 2008 presidential contenders have been
invited, but Democratic candidates are unlikely to spend time speaking at such a
hostile venue. In fact, FOF and the FRC have made their disdain for the Democratic
field clear. Leaders of the groups seem infuriated that the Democrats are daring to
raise religious themes this time.
Tom Minnery, senior vice president of government and public policy for Focus on the
Family, attacked Obama in a July 5 column that was distributed through WorldNetDaily,
a right-wing Web site.
Minnery called Obama "thoroughly misleading about the proper roles of religion and
government" for suggesting that government should play a bigger role in the provision
of health care and aid to the poor.
Minnery's boss, James Dobson, has been hosting meetings with GOP contenders and is
expected to issue an endorsement closer to the election. He has not bothered to meet
with any Democrats. Dobson, who has formed a political arm called Focus on the Family
Action, claims to endorse candidates as an individual, which the law allows.
But other efforts undertaken by Religious Right groups and leaders are legally
questionable. FRC's attack on Romney and its tacit support for Thompson appears to be
an attempt to affect the outcome of the race. Such tactics skirt the legal line and
may, in fact, lurch over it.
As the election season plays out, Americans United (the organization which publishes
Church and State magazine) has re-activated its Project Fair Play to assure that
houses of worship and non-profit religious groups abide by the law. The Internal
Revenue Service has signaled a crackdown on abuses as well.
Americans United Executive Director Barry W. Lynn has criticized the overemphasis on
religion in both parties, discussing the issue frequently in the media.
At a recent forum on religion in public life in Austin, Lynn blasted candidates in
both parties for "hiring ethics and religion advisers -- that is to say, spin
doctors." Lynn added, "It suggests they are not really comfortable themselves knowing
whatever it is they do believe.
"This is pandering," Lynn concluded.
Rob Boston is the editor of Church and State magazine.
View this story online at: http://www.alternet.org/story/61381/
-----------------------------------------------------------
'''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''
-----------------------------------------------------------
Still the most concise explanation of how we are who we are:
"Let me give you a word of the philosophy of reform. The whole history of the progress
of human liberty shows that all concessions yet made to her August claims, have been
born of earnest struggle. The conflict has been exciting, agitating, all-absorbing,
and for the time being, putting all other tumults to silence. It must do this or it
does nothing. If there is no struggle there is no progress. Those who profess to favor
freedom and yet depreciate agitation, are men who want crops without plowing up the
ground, they want rain without thunder and lightening. They want the ocean without
the awful roar of its many waters."
"This struggle may be a moral one, or it may be a physical one, and it may
be both moral and physical, but it must be a struggle. Power concedes nothing
without a demand. It never did and it never will. Find out just what any people will
quietly submit to and you have found out the exact measure of injustice and wrong
which will be imposed upon them, and these will continue till they are resisted with
either words or blows, or with both. The limits of tyrants are prescribed by the
endurance of those whom they oppress."
---Frederick Douglass
Source: Douglass, Frederick. [1857] (1985). "The Significance of
Emancipation in the West Indies." Speech, Canandaigua, New York, August 3,
1857; collected in pamphlet by author.
http://www.buildingequality.us/Quotes/Frederick_Douglass.htm
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
For the purpose of this perspective, I will consider the following regimes: Nazi
Germany, Fascist Italy, Franco